It is fascinating to note that atheists boast that most (whatever that means) scientists are atheists. They then boast that scientific findings lend weight to atheism (whatever that means).
They appear to be un-skeptical (as is usual) that atheists would come to atheistic conclusions. They are (for some reason) convinced that these atheist scientists are unbiased and strictly truth seekers.
This is the ideal of science but such a view is naïve—this has been thoroughly chronicled in the parsed essay:
Elaine Howard Ecklund has written the book, Science vs Religion: What Scientists Really Think
Here’s the Amazon description:
That the longstanding antagonism between science and religion is irreconcilable has been taken for granted. And in the wake of recent controversies over teaching intelligent design and the ethics of stem-cell research, the divide seems as unbridgeable as ever.
On this note, see:
The Myth of Warfare Between “Science,” “Religion” and “Miracles”
…In the course of her research, Ecklund surveyed nearly 1,700 scientists and interviewed 275 of them.
She finds that most of what we believe about the faith lives of elite scientists is wrong.
Nearly 50 percent of them are religious. Many others are what she calls "spiritual entrepreneurs," seeking creative ways to work with the tensions between science and faith outside the constraints of traditional religion…Only a small minority are actively hostile to religion…
Within the survey, she discovered individuals who identified no religious tradition but considered themselves to be spiritual (spiritual atheists). Among those who were religious, she found varying beliefs about the ultimate nature of things, including intelligent design, evolution, and creationism.
Professors presented their convictions or silenced them, either bringing religious thinking into classrooms or keeping it out. Many saw religion as useful in teaching ethical behavior in society. Ecklund concludes by dispelling myths about today's science professors, offering an evidence-based peek behind the doors of academia.
The “spiritual atheists” statement is interesting when you consider personages such as Sam Harris and anti-Christian activist who is an atheist Buddhist mystic (who does not like the terms “atheist,” or “mystic”). This is very common as atheists confront the spiritual, emotional, psychological bankruptcy which atheism is and they turn to, essentially, neo-Pagan Atheism—see:
One issue of contention is whether the atheist scientists became atheists upon being confronted by the scientific conclusions to which they came. This is very, very unlikely as very many atheists become so in childhood. Thus, it is noted that these personages got into the sciences in order to delve into their chosen worldview: materialism. They seek material explanations and end up restricting their thinking.
In fact, the Amazon review references, “a physicist who chose not to believe in God well before he decided to become a scientist.”
This may all proceed forth from the “whatever it’s worth” files but nevertheless, it may be of interest.
Comments